If it wasn't for Nintendo's seal of quality, the game industry would have fallen out.
Or the fact that the "seal of quality" meant that they were holding their 3rd parties at gunpoint, forcing them not to dev for SMS or other systems?
When NES and SNES ruled, games were $40 max. Now at least $50. As far as PS games being cheaper in EU, ???, sony is a big company, maybe they have better distributers over there, so costs are lower. After 20 years Nintendo's portable games are basically the same price $20-30 and the home games have jump up by $10. Whereas Sony has taken prices to $60-$70 and increased the price of a game console every year.
Wrong. Did you even live in the USA and buy games during the early and mid 90s? I bought atleast 3 SNES games at or above $60 USD (Chrono Trigger, FFIII, Super Mario RPG). Rest of them were $50 or so.
NES,SNES,N64,GC -- $200, Wii - $250. (only because they wanted to make a profit, wow is that too much for a business to do?) A profit of what $25 per console.
Nintendo profits $100 per console, give or take. It's using utter trash hardware (about 1.5x the power of the old Xbox), therefore Nintendo is bending everyone over and you know what(ing) them even at a "deal" of $250. Nintendo is using the poor pricing of the PS3 and 360 to overcharge the consumer.
PS1 - $200, PS2 - $300, PS3 - $600, what's next? PS4 - $1200. BS.
PS1 was $300 at launch. Get it right.
Yes, nintendo forced 3rd parties into contracts and that was what helped Sony. Now, Sony's got the big head and has created something that is ultra expensive for us and devs. Whereas Nintendo is trying to keep the costs for everyone down by not jumping into a toddler HD world.
Thats why Red Steel cost $12 million USD to make, right? (compared to Gears of War's $10m budget)